Halakhah for Sanhedrin 56:22
ודילמא כגון אנא ופנחס משום דגיסו קאמר
But [again] if this is itsmeaning: A step-son himself; while as for a brother-in-law, [the exclusionextends to] his son and son-in-law; whereas R. Jose reversed this: Abrother-in-law himself; while as for a step-son, [the exclusion extends to]his son and son-in-law too: in that case, what R. Hiyya taught, viz., thatthe Mishnah enumerates eight chief relations which [together with the sonsand sons-in-law] involve twenty-four inall,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 28a. ');"><sup>31</sup></span>
Sefer HaChinukh
Regarding the matter of one who was a relative and became distant (no longer a relative), we hold that he is proper (Sanhedrin 28b); and even if there are sons there - as the law is not like Rabbi Yehudah, who holds that if there are sons there, he is disqualified.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy